July 02, 2015

Musings on Life's Complexity

As a forewarning, I have decided to indulge a little in some nonscientific musings. It’s been too long since I’ve written anything, so I thought I’d share some of my thoughts of recent weeks.

Increasingly, as I read fascinating scientific studies from a variety of sources, I am convinced beyond little doubt that Life is too complex and efficient to be the result of unguided, accidental evolution. It’s the suicide of intuition to embrace Darwinism—in any of its godless flavors. My intuition shouts—no screams!—that Life is designed, one way or the other. Single cells that appear to have eyes, mobility, and hunting skills[1]; the efficient, proton pumps in cells; small creatures with precision guidance systems that detect the magnetic field of the earth; birds that seem to utilize quantum entanglement in their eyes[2,3]; tiny fruit flies that can tell the time and learn to count[4,5]; fireflies that can synchronize their flashing; and geckos that can use the “van der Waals” force,[6] all have only one intuitive answer to how they exist: a Higher Intelligence. For me, I’m not ashamed or afraid to name this Higher Intelligence. It’s the Omnipotent God of the Bible.

Resorting to “survival of the fittest” as a primary mechanism for efficient designs in animals is pathetic. That’s like trying to explain how cars avoid colliding by saying they have brakes and a steering wheel. The controls are important, but the drivers are much more critical. Those who don’t believe in God are simply blind. They have closed the eyes of their intuition to follow the pipedreams of intellectual alternatives that don’t require God. The problem is that God was necessary, and it’s pretty obvious. Assuming that God did create the universe and Life, what happens if you deny this Creator and try to dream up a way that it could have happened without Him? You endlessly chase evolving theories that are always inadequate. That’s what Neo-Darwinists do. They are like dogs chasing their tails, hoping to catch up with themselves. Silly dogs.

Let’s talk general complexity a bit. Our understanding of Life is growing each year, and the picture is getting overwhelmingly and stunningly complex. Not only is there an efficient genetic code that all life uses, there’s an efficient epigenetic environment that the code resides within that effects which genes are active or inactive. Epigenetics allows organisms to quickly adapt within a single generation. There’s also four-stranded DNA,[7] circular RNA,[8] and who knows what else.

Even the simplest cells (prokaryotes) have at least 160,000 letters of genetic code, which is perhaps equivalent to a 200-page book. They can replicate themselves rapidly, take in “fuel,” and repair their DNA. They have polyhedral microcompartments. Many have ways to move about and to modify their environment by secreting chemicals. That’s just the simplest cells on earth. Going from that to eukaryotic cells, of which all animals are made, is a quantum leap of complexity.

Life lives in almost every place on earth. It’s found at the bottom of the ocean, under super high pressures. It’s found two miles down in the ground,[9] in the extreme cold climate of Antarctica, in temperatures over 160ºF, and can even live in the vacuum of space. Life thrives on earth and can seemingly adapt to any environment.

If you say that wonder and awe and amazement are all just meaningless emotions, I must disagree. These emotions, to me, are intuitive guideposts. When something is too good to be true, it usually is. The amazement over Life’s complexity not only is pleasurable, it is a voice from my intuition that reminds me that Life is extraordinary, beautiful, and well-crafted by a mind-blowingly intelligent Designer.

[1] http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150701133348.htm


  1. Here is an interesting article from the site called Earth Sky (don't know if you have ever heard of it):

    What if the Universe Had No Beginning

    It talks about the Big Bang somewhat.

  2. Joel, what do you think of this:

    UK Apologetics: The Age of the Earth

    This article makes several statements. Here are a few:

    1. That the earth would have stopped turning if it were billions of years old.

    2. The earth can't be over 6,000 years, because 20,000 years ago, enough heat would have generated to liquefy the planet if it were billons of years old.

    3. If the earth were billions of years old, all the natural gas would have escaped.